Is the intention a Civil War ?

[Tech_Esq]

Oh please....hysterical much?

Cause and movement conservatives like to talk big shit about standing up to tyranny, their 2nd amendment solutions, seccession etc. But that's all it is, talk and fantasy.

After they're done talking, they go home, eat dinner and watch NCIS with their fat wives, fantasizing about being tough and killing bad guys.

Have to disagree with you on that one.

People like JB and his minions on this board actually want an excuse to murder (in cold blood) anyone who disagrees with their rw dogma. "Civil war" is just a code for that goal.

I see a lot of talk about "code words" from people on the left. In reality though, either I'm highly untrusted by my brethren on the right, or we don't have all these code words. However, I have seen a lot of "code words" used by those on the left. So maybe all this talk is just transference.

 

[Spoonman]

Seriously, seccession and civil war fantasies are republican porn.

Guess articles like this just give them a reason and an opportunity to fanasize.

except for the fact that the only ones to ever actually attempt to secede have been the democrats. go figure

 

[emilynghiem]

I think some form of secession is much more likely than a civil war. The country is so divided philosophically right now, it will be very hard to bring it back together, and obama is doing everything possible to deepen the divide.

Dear Redfish: If secession happens it can be done civilly in two ways, financially and politically:
1. divide the budget by party, where Republicans can pay back military expenses the Democrats veto and fund what that membership believes is the role of federal govt;
and likewise, let Democrats fund and structure the health care and other social programs that party and its members believe in, without imposing on any dissenting parties. The two parties can lend and borrow between each other, and let taxpayers choose where to invest their federal taxes. I would recommend capping income tax at 10% eventually, but 15-20% for now until the budget is balanced. And give taxpayers and states the choice to LEND to federal govt anything above that amount provided it goes into what is agreed to pay for and under what terms, similar to how the investors in the Federal Reserve get interest from lending to govt.
In short taxpayers should be REWARDED for investing in solutions to govt problems, not punished for the lack of corrections.

2. assess debts and damages owed to taxpayers for corporate or other criminal abuses of govt resources, issue restitution notes against those amounts to go into whatever those funds should have paid for (such as medicare fraud or Vet fraud, etc.) and use the notes to invest in and create jobs, service and educational programs around the corrections. Hold the wrongdoers responsible for paying back the amounts owed; and in the meantime, whatever public property or programs are funded with the restitution money will be held as "collateral" against the debts. So either the govt is responsible for collecting back from the wrongdoers who misspent the money (creating jobs for accountants and lawyers to negotiate and collect on these settlements), OR the people and private investors who aren't responsible for the wrongful abuses have the option of BUYING OUT the debts and OWNING the collateral. so either the govt has to pay back taxpayers and fix these problems charged to us, or if the private sector can do a better job, then those programs and resources will be under that jurisdiction. This will either correct or shrink govt to levels of direct accountability, and localize representation and direct participation in solutions.

NOTE: for examples of issuing local currency contact PAUL GLOVER with Ithaca HOURS
Ithaca Hours - Local Currency - Ithaca, New York OR Home
These systems are based on labor-backed currency. The system of restitution I am proposing, modeled after the Federal Reserve, would issue notes against debts and damages owed to taxpayers provided there is collateral on the loans and an agreement to pay back the loans being invested in correction per project or issue, and thus creating jobs and education around each. The district where I live offers a prime example of how such a model solution can be tested out, by building a campus for Vet jobs and business training, housing and health care while restoring a national historic site destroyed by govt abuse at taxpayer expense: http://www.freedmenstown.com
(Another site is the Headwaters Forest in CA, destroyed by corporate takeover that cost taxpayers an estimated $1.6 billion. By issuing notes against the total cost of restoring the forest, river ecosystem and endangered species, and holding the forest as collateral on this debt to taxpayers, California could fund its own sustainable economy creating jobs and educational internships
around this one environmental project alone! Its value far exceeds the corporate welfare and junk bonds bailed out by taxpayers.)

 

[Redfish]

I think some form of secession is much more likely than a civil war. The country is so divided philosophically right now, it will be very hard to bring it back together, and obama is doing everything possible to deepen the divide.

Dear Redfish: If secession happens it can be done civilly in two ways, financially and politically:
1. divide the budget by party, where Republicans can pay back military expenses the Democrats veto and fund what that membership believes is the role of federal govt;
and likewise, let Democrats fund and structure the health care and other social programs that party and its members believe in, without imposing on any dissenting parties. The two parties can lend and borrow between each other, and let taxpayers choose where to invest their federal taxes. I would recommend capping income tax at 10% eventually, but 15-20% for now until the budget is balanced. And give taxpayers and states the choice to LEND to federal govt anything above that amount provided it goes into what is agreed to pay for and under what terms, similar to how the investors in the Federal Reserve get interest from lending to govt.
In short taxpayers should be REWARDED for investing in solutions to govt problems, not punished for the lack of corrections.

2. assess debts and damages owed to taxpayers for corporate or other criminal abuses of govt resources, issue restitution notes against those amounts to go into whatever those funds should have paid for (such as medicare fraud or Vet fraud, etc.) and use the notes to invest in and create jobs, service and educational programs around the corrections. Hold the wrongdoers responsible for paying back the amounts owed; and in the meantime, whatever public property or programs are funded with the restitution money will be held as "collateral" against the debts. So either the govt is responsible for collecting back from the wrongdoers who misspent the money (creating jobs for accountants and lawyers to negotiate and collect on these settlements), OR the people and private investors who aren't responsible for the wrongful abuses have the option of BUYING OUT the debts and OWNING the collateral. so either the govt has to pay back taxpayers and fix these problems charged to us, or if the private sector can do a better job, then those programs and resources will be under that jurisdiction. This will either correct or shrink govt to levels of direct accountability, and localize representation and direct participation in solutions.

NOTE: for examples of issuing local currency contact PAUL GLOVER with Ithaca HOURS
Ithaca Hours - Local Currency - Ithaca, New York OR Home
These systems are based on labor-backed currency. The system of restitution I am proposing, modeled after the Federal Reserve, would issue notes against debts and damages owed to taxpayers provided there is collateral on the loans and an agreement to pay back the loans being invested in correction per project or issue, and thus creating jobs and education around each. The district where I live offers a prime example of how such a model solution can be tested out, by building a campus for Vet jobs and business training, housing and health care while restoring a national historic site destroyed by govt abuse at taxpayer expense: Freedmen's Town Historic Churches and Vet Housing
(Another site is the Headwaters Forest in CA, destroyed by corporate takeover that cost taxpayers an estimated $1.6 billion. By issuing notes against the total cost of restoring the forest, river ecosystem and endangered species, and holding the forest as collateral on this debt to taxpayers, California could fund its own sustainable economy creating jobs and educational internships
around this one environmental project alone! Its value far exceeds the corporate welfare and junk bonds bailed out by taxpayers.)

your forms of secession are not really secession, secession would mean a state or states would declare their independence from the USA. The states that secede would then have to take financial responsibility for provideing the services to their citizens that were proviced by DC, such as SS and medicare and a military force. The DC govt would have no claim on any money or assets in the seceded states.

Its not going to happen, but I do see a lot of future conflict since the country is divided about 50/50 on the role of govt.

 

[Unkotare]

Obama is attacking our rights from all angles and you want to call us crazy for defending them?
He's starting shit on purpose so he can further his agenda. And it's obvious.

Your rights are not being attacked in reality - only in the world of nutcase blogs and acid flashbacks.

Pretending otherwise is not only stupid, it's based on the insane premise that the American did people did not just democratically re-elect Obama three months ago. Accept that, accept the will of the people, and join the World of the Living.

Don't you have some rotten fish to dig up, foreigner? Keep your nose out of the affairs of your betters. We'll let you know when you need to pretend to have an opinion.

 

[emilynghiem]

I think some form of secession is much more likely than a civil war. The country is so divided philosophically right now, it will be very hard to bring it back together, and obama is doing everything possible to deepen the divide.

Dear Redfish: If secession happens it can be done civilly in two ways, financially and politically:
1. divide the budget by party, where Republicans can pay back military expenses the Democrats veto and fund what that membership believes is the role of federal govt;
and likewise, let Democrats fund and structure the health care and other social programs that party and its members believe in, without imposing on any dissenting parties. The two parties can lend and borrow between each other, and let taxpayers choose where to invest their federal taxes. I would recommend capping income tax at 10% eventually, but 15-20% for now until the budget is balanced. And give taxpayers and states the choice to LEND to federal govt anything above that amount provided it goes into what is agreed to pay for and under what terms, similar to how the investors in the Federal Reserve get interest from lending to govt.
In short taxpayers should be REWARDED for investing in solutions to govt problems, not punished for the lack of corrections.

2. assess debts and damages owed to taxpayers for corporate or other criminal abuses of govt resources, issue restitution notes against those amounts to go into whatever those funds should have paid for (such as medicare fraud or Vet fraud, etc.) and use the notes to invest in and create jobs, service and educational programs around the corrections. Hold the wrongdoers responsible for paying back the amounts owed; and in the meantime, whatever public property or programs are funded with the restitution money will be held as "collateral" against the debts. So either the govt is responsible for collecting back from the wrongdoers who misspent the money (creating jobs for accountants and lawyers to negotiate and collect on these settlements), OR the people and private investors who aren't responsible for the wrongful abuses have the option of BUYING OUT the debts and OWNING the collateral. so either the govt has to pay back taxpayers and fix these problems charged to us, or if the private sector can do a better job, then those programs and resources will be under that jurisdiction. This will either correct or shrink govt to levels of direct accountability, and localize representation and direct participation in solutions.

NOTE: for examples of issuing local currency contact PAUL GLOVER with Ithaca HOURS
Ithaca Hours - Local Currency - Ithaca, New York OR Home
These systems are based on labor-backed currency. The system of restitution I am proposing, modeled after the Federal Reserve, would issue notes against debts and damages owed to taxpayers provided there is collateral on the loans and an agreement to pay back the loans being invested in correction per project or issue, and thus creating jobs and education around each. The district where I live offers a prime example of how such a model solution can be tested out, by building a campus for Vet jobs and business training, housing and health care while restoring a national historic site destroyed by govt abuse at taxpayer expense: Freedmen's Town Historic Churches and Vet Housing
(Another site is the Headwaters Forest in CA, destroyed by corporate takeover that cost taxpayers an estimated $1.6 billion. By issuing notes against the total cost of restoring the forest, river ecosystem and endangered species, and holding the forest as collateral on this debt to taxpayers, California could fund its own sustainable economy creating jobs and educational internships
around this one environmental project alone! Its value far exceeds the corporate welfare and junk bonds bailed out by taxpayers.)

your forms of secession are not really secession, secession would mean a state or states would declare their independence from the USA. The states that secede would then have to take financial responsibility for provideing the services to their citizens that were proviced by DC, such as SS and medicare and a military force. The DC govt would have no claim on any money or assets in the seceded states.

Its not going to happen, but I do see a lot of future conflict since the country is divided about 50/50 on the role of govt.

I can see a partial secession by agreeing WHAT services are reserved to the States and People and WHAT part is agreed by ALL to be within limited powers of federal govt.

We need this agreement, and anything we don't agree on can be delegated by PARTY which can be state, local, federal etc. We can do this, and it can be completely civil!

 

[Redfish]

Dear Redfish: If secession happens it can be done civilly in two ways, financially and politically:
1. divide the budget by party, where Republicans can pay back military expenses the Democrats veto and fund what that membership believes is the role of federal govt;
and likewise, let Democrats fund and structure the health care and other social programs that party and its members believe in, without imposing on any dissenting parties. The two parties can lend and borrow between each other, and let taxpayers choose where to invest their federal taxes. I would recommend capping income tax at 10% eventually, but 15-20% for now until the budget is balanced. And give taxpayers and states the choice to LEND to federal govt anything above that amount provided it goes into what is agreed to pay for and under what terms, similar to how the investors in the Federal Reserve get interest from lending to govt.
In short taxpayers should be REWARDED for investing in solutions to govt problems, not punished for the lack of corrections.

2. assess debts and damages owed to taxpayers for corporate or other criminal abuses of govt resources, issue restitution notes against those amounts to go into whatever those funds should have paid for (such as medicare fraud or Vet fraud, etc.) and use the notes to invest in and create jobs, service and educational programs around the corrections. Hold the wrongdoers responsible for paying back the amounts owed; and in the meantime, whatever public property or programs are funded with the restitution money will be held as "collateral" against the debts. So either the govt is responsible for collecting back from the wrongdoers who misspent the money (creating jobs for accountants and lawyers to negotiate and collect on these settlements), OR the people and private investors who aren't responsible for the wrongful abuses have the option of BUYING OUT the debts and OWNING the collateral. so either the govt has to pay back taxpayers and fix these problems charged to us, or if the private sector can do a better job, then those programs and resources will be under that jurisdiction. This will either correct or shrink govt to levels of direct accountability, and localize representation and direct participation in solutions.

NOTE: for examples of issuing local currency contact PAUL GLOVER with Ithaca HOURS
Ithaca Hours - Local Currency - Ithaca, New York OR Home
These systems are based on labor-backed currency. The system of restitution I am proposing, modeled after the Federal Reserve, would issue notes against debts and damages owed to taxpayers provided there is collateral on the loans and an agreement to pay back the loans being invested in correction per project or issue, and thus creating jobs and education around each. The district where I live offers a prime example of how such a model solution can be tested out, by building a campus for Vet jobs and business training, housing and health care while restoring a national historic site destroyed by govt abuse at taxpayer expense: Freedmen's Town Historic Churches and Vet Housing
(Another site is the Headwaters Forest in CA, destroyed by corporate takeover that cost taxpayers an estimated $1.6 billion. By issuing notes against the total cost of restoring the forest, river ecosystem and endangered species, and holding the forest as collateral on this debt to taxpayers, California could fund its own sustainable economy creating jobs and educational internships
around this one environmental project alone! Its value far exceeds the corporate welfare and junk bonds bailed out by taxpayers.)

your forms of secession are not really secession, secession would mean a state or states would declare their independence from the USA. The states that secede would then have to take financial responsibility for provideing the services to their citizens that were proviced by DC, such as SS and medicare and a military force. The DC govt would have no claim on any money or assets in the seceded states.

Its not going to happen, but I do see a lot of future conflict since the country is divided about 50/50 on the role of govt.

I can see a partial secession by agreeing WHAT services are reserved to the States and People and WHAT part is agreed by ALL to be within limited powers of federal govt.

We need this agreement, and anything we don't agree on can be delegated by PARTY which can be state, local, federal etc. We can do this, and it can be completely civil!

It would never work, different federal services for each state? nope, not workable.

It would have to be a complete break, and it could be civil. I am sure that Texas and Louisiana would be glad to sell oil to the northern states, and they could sell us--------------oops, they don't make anything that we need.

 

[Old Rocks]

The issue of seccession was settled at Appatmotox.

 

[emilynghiem]

Obama is attacking our rights from all angles and you want to call us crazy for defending them?
He's starting shit on purpose so he can further his agenda. And it's obvious.

Your rights are not being attacked in reality - only in the world of nutcase blogs and acid flashbacks.

Pretending otherwise is not only stupid, it's based on the insane premise that the American did people did not just democratically re-elect Obama three months ago. Accept that, accept the will of the people, and join the World of the Living.

Dear Saigon: Yes and no.
The same way one side argued Bush stole the election and did not fairly represent all the public, now the shoe is on the other foot. You are right if you are addressing people who SUBMIT to this system of party politics to bully others into submission, but I don't.

Instead I enforce the Constitutional concept of "equal protection" of interests and representation, including equal respect for religious beliefs, where I ALSO hold political beliefs to be INCLUDED as protected from govt bias and exclusion. So TO ME, and for those who believe as I do, it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL/unlawful for any person or party to impose partisan beliefs
against the will of dissidents, because it violates the 1st and 14th Amendment (and also the Code of Ethics for Govt Service).

So for people like me -- NO -- it was NOT lawful for either Bush OR for Obama to impose agenda against the will of half the nation.

You can use your arguments with people who abused majority rule in one case,
and now reaping what they sow and getting it back as they did do to others.

But this argument CANNOT be used to punish people like me who dissented in both
cases and who argue EQUALLY for the rights of prochoice and prolife advocates,
people for or against federal mandates on health care and gun control, to be free from religious imposition by abuse of govt, party and political bullying by majority rule that clearly violates equal protection of interests and beliefs under Constitutional laws and ethics.

You can collectively punish people who believe in collective punishment.
But not those like me who believe in consensus and restorative justice, not retributive.

I have just as much right to exercise and defend my beliefs and interpretation
of the Constitution; but it's hard when everyone else is too busy imposing back and forth!
I don't agree with ANY of that bullying, and CERTAINLY don't agree to be punished for it!
Please don't teach or preach that this is justified as lawful because it isn't ethical.

You are making my job that much harder by encouraging more bullying by rewarding it with authority.
I recognize the authority of people who represent the rule of law and interests of all people,
not the agenda of those who abuse majority rule to push their partisan agenda! Not ethical!

 

[Redfish]

The issue of seccession was settled at Appatmotox.

THAT issue of secession was settled.

 

[Avatar4321]

It would never work, different federal services for each state? nope, not workable.

It would have to be a complete break, and it could be civil. I am sure that Texas and Louisiana would be glad to sell oil to the northern states, and they could sell us--------------oops, they don't make anything that we need.

You don't need food?

 

[emilynghiem]

We need this agreement, and anything we don't agree on can be delegated by PARTY which can be state, local, federal etc. We can do this, and it can be completely civil!

It would never work, different federal services for each state? nope, not workable.

It would have to be a complete break, and it could be civil. I am sure that Texas and Louisiana would be glad to sell oil to the northern states, and they could sell us--------------oops, they don't make anything that we need.

1. we can let the parties work that out per state. The Reps, Dems, Greens Libertarians Occupy and Tea Party have national umbrella networks and also state and local.

2. TX NM AZ and CA (and FL) have issues with immigration and trafficking
that affect these states more than others. if you look at the restitution owed for crimes
per state, this is relative and proportional to the population.

So if each state assesses its underfunded historic/environmental landmarks, which can be restored to create sustainable jobs and campuses for education and service internships,
we can localize economic development, and only delegate to federal govt what cannot be done per state.

This will streamline and simplify a lot of the bureaucracy of federal govt.
The major parties are experienced with organizing between the federal, state and local levels and can use their representatives and district/precinct groups to address this.

So shift the responsibility to the parties to pay for their own proposed programs and policies,
and they can restructure it per state etc. since they have elected reps on all levels.

NOTE: The Greens have been advocating for forms of proportional representation by Party, and also for independent/local currency, and run their platforms based on consensus decisions. So the Greens and Libertarians could be called on to help facilitate how to separate out the issues to be delegated per Party and take this burden off federal govt.

 

[Tech_Esq]

The issue of seccession was settled at Appatmotox.

No, it was settled in White v. Texas.

Don't always go for the simple answer.

 

[Katzndogz]

The issue of seccession was settled at Appatmotox.

THAT issue of secession was settled.

The issue that was settled is that states can not seceed as a matter of right. It doesn't stop a state from seceeding.

 

[emilynghiem]

It would never work, different federal services for each state? nope, not workable.

It would have to be a complete break, and it could be civil. I am sure that Texas and Louisiana would be glad to sell oil to the northern states, and they could sell us--------------oops, they don't make anything that we need.

You don't need food?

All states have educational systems, and if they are agricultural the training and businesses are tied to those directly or indirectly. So we could use the academic system to organize representation that accounts for the diversity of resources and interests of the population per State, and then connect this nationally.

 

[boilermaker55]

They are the same individuals that think corporations are people and they should be able to pay anyone what ever they want. But now they don't want to be fired for their first amendment rights.
A little ludicrous.

Even Liberals thought that the firing of Juan Williams had gone to far.
I have never run down black people.
How about the insults to white people?

The 1st amendment protects your speech against government reprisal. It does not protect you from private recriminations.

Here's something for you to try. Curse out your boss, get fired, then sue based on 1st amendment protection and see how far you get.

 

[emilynghiem]

The issue of seccession was settled at Appatmotox.

THAT issue of secession was settled.

The issue that was settled is that states can not seceed as a matter of right. It doesn't stop a state from seceeding.

Individuals can "secede" financially or religiously from any institution by investing labor and resources elsewhere. Businesses or churches can be set up where either no money is paid into the govt, or business expenses are deducted out. As long as you are enforcing the law and not breaking it, you can exercise equal power of government as anyone else. It is only when you violate the law, or get in conflict with another person or party you don't resolve yourself directly, that you invite a third party authority to step in and manage things for you.

 

[Tech_Esq]

The issue of seccession was settled at Appatmotox.

THAT issue of secession was settled.

Really it was a question of "legal" secession under the Constitution. The concept was that conventions, not legislatures voted for the Constitution (accepting the social contract), so only conventions elected for the purpose could remove a state from the union (repudiation of the social contract). Philosophically, the southern states were correct.

However, they were then introduced to another concept of political philosophy: Might makes right.

So, point really proved is, if you are bad enough to kick the other guy's ass, then it doesn't matter what the "right way is" period. Some bullies on here are proud of that fact. I don't think it's anything to be proud of.

But, the point for the future is, if the other side doesn't have the stones to keep the country together no matter what the cost, then the seceding side wins. If the seceding side can kick the ass of the non-seceding side, then the seceding side wins. If they can't then the other side wins. Simple as that. The court will always back the result. Again see White v. Texas.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

JB Williams -- Is Obama Pushing for a Civil War?

conspiracy thread posing as a political thread? Let me look back on who is keeping this allow with multiple replies

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

what a joke


never mind